The system described specifically mentions repeat offenses. If you mouth off every now and then, or happen to offend one group of people in one game then you won't get punished. If your 'off days' are 6 out of 7 days of the week then you'll probably accumulate enough reports to trigger punishment. Same with the occasional afk. In other words, if the system works they are describing it, you won't be effected.

Other gamers are other people. Treating people decently has nothing to do with utopianism. Punishment of bad behavior in an effort to promote a healthy community is not indicative of totalitarianism.

Sound thoughts. But I think they are more applicable to the citizenry than online computer gaming. Do you want your games more policed?

Sound thoughts. But I think they are more applicable to the citizenry than online computer gaming. Do you want your games more policed?

Really?

Online games have been policed for years. Remember the days of dedicated servers for your favorite FPS? They all had private, dedicated servers...the best of which where monitored by the administrators on a consistent basis, which often featured automated systems to remove toxic players. They'd boot the shitheads so everyone else could have a good time.

It was not uncommon for there to be AFK timers. It was not uncommon for people who team-killed (assuming it was enabled) to be booted if they were abusing the fact it was turned on. It was not uncommon for people spewing hateful or ignorant speech to get the boot, nor was it uncommon for people to get booted who were a pain in the ass over voice chat once that became integrated.

Nothing has changed, beyond the removal of dedicated servers and the presence of a massive, automated system that ultimately only goes into effect once it is reviewed by people. If anything, people can get away with shitty behavior for longer periods of time because of everything being centralized. Some of the dedicated servers I used to play on could be considered downright Draconian by comparison.

Online games have been policed for years. Remember the days of dedicated servers for your favorite FPS? They all had private, dedicated servers...the best of which where monitored by the administrators on a consistent basis, which often featured automated systems to remove toxic players. They'd boot the shitheads so everyone else could have a good time.

It was not uncommon for there to be AFK timers. It was not uncommon for people who team-killed (assuming it was enabled) to be booted if they were abusing the fact it was turned on. It was not uncommon for people spewing hateful or ignorant speech to get the boot, nor was it uncommon for people to get booted who were a pain in the ass over voice chat once that became integrated.

Nothing has changed, beyond the removal of dedicated servers and the presence of a massive, automated system that ultimately only goes into effect once it is reviewed by people. If anything, people can get away with shitty behavior for longer periods of time because of everything being centralized. Some of the dedicated servers I used to play on could be considered downright Draconian by comparison.

Don't minimize the change. At least back then if you got permabanned from a server (often for nothing at all more than a ban-happy admin) you could at least go find another server to play on.

When the people/players police it's better than an all-encompassing power like the frigging developer.

Don't minimize the change. At least back then if you got permabanned from a server (often for nothing at all more than a ban-happy admin) you could at least go find another server to play on.

When the people/players police it's better than an all-encompassing power like the frigging developer.

Here's the thing: With the systems Overwatch currently has in place, you essentially have to try - or consistently ignore/refuse to correct a problem - to get banned. While there will always be examples of false positives, the vast majority of temporary and permanent bans being handed out are legitimate.

Quote:

It's like we moved from States rights to Federal oversight in gaming.

While this would be a terrible idea for our government...we're talking about a competitive online game. The competitive modes and systems Blizzard has in place would never work with private dedicated servers; even Valve has centralized servers for the competitive modes in TF2 and Counter-Strike.

Unfortunately, there needs to be systems in place to police player behavior. When the system is as expansive as Overwatch, a certain level of automation is required.

Oh BULLSHIT. "Bad behavior" is far too often defined so as to enforce totalitarian views and ideology. For evidence, see the fascist fundamentalist actions of leftists at far too many universities. Stray from their ideological plantation and your 'bad behavior' will be 'punished' with violence.

Private universities have every right to define bad behavior as they wish and expel anyone they wish. They should be able to culture an environment that suits themselves. If you don't like it you can choose to not attend said university. Punishment with violence is illegal. Whether or not it's healthy for a university to police speech is another argument.

This has nothing to do with totalitarianism. For example, a grocery store has a right to maintain an environment that they feel is conducive to their business. If you go into a grocery store and start yelling profanity (protected speech, mind you) an employee will likely ask you to stop. If you don't, you will be asked to leave. If you again refuse the police will be called and you will be arrested. This is what the reporting system is akin to. This is not totalitarianism.

Private universities have every right to define bad behavior as they wish and expel anyone they wish.

WRONG; NOT if they accept ANY federal, state, or local tax funding, either directly or through student tuition payments that include such funding. Nor do students cede constitutional rights merely by enrolling in institutions of 'higher learning' (lol@the irony of 'learning' there, when one considers the closemindedness of so many of these 'bastions of academic inquiry'). That means that EVERY single college/university in the country can NOT "define" behavior or policies as it sees fit, with the solitary exception of the only school that refuses such money: Hillsdale College, ranked in the top 100 by US News rankings but left off the list by the Obama admin because Hillsdale decided to "define" its own policies for itself and not to let the feds do that for it. If you take money from the state or feds, which is the case for all but Hillsdale, you will tow the line and if you don't 'define' your policies and rules as the feds/state see fit, you'll feel the leash violently tugged by them.

And yes indeed, it has EVERYTHING to do with totalitarianism, as "bad behavior" has been dumbed down (like "racism") to enforce ideologically driven limitations on thought and behavior by progtardian fundamentalist fascists. Because...they 'need some muscle over here!' to stop people straying outside of their accepted leftist fundie constraints.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eats

"...boys lining up outside a room to take a turn gang raping a woman?...I went to frat parties where shit like this was going down

Private universities have every right to define bad behavior as they wish and expel anyone they wish. They should be able to culture an environment that suits themselves.

Private universities are technically funded by the government, just indirectly. People can make "charitable donations" to private universities and get huge tax breaks as a result. The universities themselves get tax breaks on the endowments (no capital gains tax).

Did you mean encouraged? This is Blizzard we're talking about, you don't get more SJWish as a developer than Blizzard. Remember this is the same company that removed a winning pose for Tracer because it "objectified women" apparently.

Online games have been policed for years. Remember the days of dedicated servers for your favorite FPS? They all had private, dedicated servers...the best of which where monitored by the administrators on a consistent basis, which often featured automated systems to remove toxic players. They'd boot the shitheads so everyone else could have a good time.

Which is why i loved Quake so much. Very little to no moderation. Could speak freely.

Jesus, ive been i shitlord a long time.

__________________
Nintendo: A guiding light in a sea of video game degeneracy

And yes indeed, it has EVERYTHING to do with totalitarianism, as "bad behavior" has been dumbed down (like "racism") to enforce ideologically driven limitations on thought and behavior by progtardian fundamentalist fascists. Because...they 'need some muscle over here!' to stop people straying outside of their accepted leftist fundie constraints.

What? So now you argument is about the use of the phrase "bad behavior"? Is undesirable behavior better? You aren't allowing me to use the term "bad behavior" literally because others have twisted it's meaning? Honestly I hadn't thought twice about the phrase because I was unaware that it had been high-jacked.

Non-totalitarian societies define "bad behavior" as well. Civil societies (even the free-est and most democratic ones) have penal codes to deter "bad behavior", and blizzard has a reporting system to do the same. A professor who suppresses free speech is not a "totalitarian". A bad professor and potential criminal, yes, but not a totalitarian. Totalitarianism is a form of government whereby its subjects are required to be completely obedient to the state. Blizzard Entertainment defining "bad behavior" and punishing people has nothing to do with totalitarianism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terran

WRONG; NOT if they accept ANY federal, state, or local tax funding, either directly or through student tuition payments that include such funding. Nor do students cede constitutional rights merely by enrolling in institutions of 'higher learning' (lol@the irony of 'learning' there, when one considers the closemindedness of so many of these 'bastions of academic inquiry'). That means that EVERY single college/university in the country can NOT "define" behavior or policies as it sees fit, with the solitary exception of the only school that refuses such money: Hillsdale College, ranked in the top 100 by US News rankings but left off the list by the Obama admin because Hillsdale decided to "define" its own policies for itself and not to let the feds do that for it. If you take money from the state or feds, which is the case for all but Hillsdale, you will tow the line and if you don't 'define' your policies and rules as the feds/state see fit, you'll feel the leash violently tugged by them.

Just because a school takes federal money doesn't mean that it can't write it's own rules of conduct. There is no constitutional right to attend a private university. A private institution can (entirely legally) limit expression and expel anyone who violates that expression. You do not cede your constitutional rights by attending college, but a college has the right to enforce a behavior policy. Yes, the federal government can place restrictions on how money is used and can threaten to withhold money as a means of coercion, but these private institutions don't have to take money, they choose to do so. Hillsdale college is an example of a college that functions just fine without government funding.